Omar

Switch the language of the devices and apps you use to French, if you can. Facebook, etc.

Sort of. In order to buy a book though, I also have to forego or postpone what I would have spent the money on, e.g. go to a bar, because I won't have a steady job until summer. I stopped drinking Coke at home a while ago, but I still have some on occasion if I eat out. I suspect that will stop when I can buy beer. Giordano, what do you mean exactly? In my experience, assuming people are only making intellectual errors as opposed to being guilty of maliciousness or stupidity is a good start. The best way to convince people that your position is false is to be an asshat. I guess that's easier said than done, though.

I want to start lifting, but I don't really know where to start. I also don't really want to go to the university gym and not know what I should be doing. I'm studying economics. I think it's a really interesting topic, and yet people are generally so clueless about it. I'd like to do my part to change that, because it's a fault people like to exploit in order to secure wealth for them and their friends. Frankly, I find the education I'm getting a little lacking in depth, but luckily there's a plethora of blogs and YouTube channels on the matter out there. Other than that, I have goals in school. I'm trying hard to keep my scholarship. I need to get 9s on average this semester, so about 85% in every class. That hasn't started off particularly well—I did especially badly in microeconomics despite my efforts, possibly because I had three other midterms that week. But I'm taking two classes that I know I can get an A+ (10) in if I make the effort. I've stopped drinking Coke at home. It hasn't made a huge difference in my health as far as I can tell, but it can't be a bad thing. I play guitar and bass. I'd like to have some sort of prog rock project going on someday but I have a hard time writing entire songs. I want to start reading more frequently, especially nonfiction but damn, books are stupid expensive. I don't really want to borrow them either.

Cool.

That might be bad for your back, but I imagine you've considered that.

I don't think that's why Vezon stigmatizes it. He's just been taught it's wrong. Long ago, however, this might have been the rationale.

It is pretty clear to me from first-hand experience that sexual behaviour starts much earlier than social norms would like it to. I'm saying you make it sound like you've never been in those in-between years yourself.

It's like you just jumped from childhood to adulthood without experiencing puberty at all obfuscator...

The paper in question is here. I'll read it tomorrow.

What can be done about it? This isn't what I'm after, and should be treated distinctly from adult prostitution.

That doesn't account for organized crime where prostitutes that want to leave can't due to the threat of violence. Organized crime doesn't go away after legalization. But it doesn't get worse. Just because prostitution is legal, doesn't mean rape and pimping as defined by Rpg are. The only ways it could get worse after a legalization of prostitution is if it were to pose as legitimate business, which seems unlikely to me. Legalization would also probably cause prices to decrease in the legal sector, because the risk and costs involved with running an illegal business would be cut out. This would make legitimate business more attractive both supply and demand-side. Assuming you took the Turkey thing from the Wikipedia page - that was in 2010 and only applies to two cities. The article you're arguing against was written in 2003. Compare apples to apples. My bad. In any case, all I have is a bunch of mixed data. Why do these women have no other option for survival? Is it because they're addicted to crack or heroin? Is it because they're criminals? Is it because no one else will employ them at the going wage? Is it because they're being forced to by a pimp? Source #7 is a book I can't get my hands on, so I have a hard time believing the claim, mostly because I don't know what "legalized or tolerated" means.

So, on this article you posted, sees_all: a) Prostitution is claimed to be inherently harmful and dehumanizing. It's not. That being said, it can be awful. Of course, if there are people who engage in this despite the trauma, it's safe to expect that they wouldn't be doing it if it wasn't better than the alternative. b) "Prostitution and related activities [...] fuel the growth of modern slavery by providing a façade behind which traffickers for sexual exploitation operate." How does, say, a brothel, provide a façade for human trafficking? How is it in any way practical to pretend human trafficking victims are working out of their own free will instead of doing it secretly? Making prostitution legal might not get rid of human trafficking altogether, but I don't see how it'll provide a façade for it. "Legalization of prostitution expands the market for commercial sex, opening markets for criminal enterprises and creating a safe haven for criminals who traffic people into prostitution. Organized crime networks do not register with the government, do not pay taxes, and do not protect prostitutes. Legalization simply makes it easier for them to blend in with a purportedly regulated sex sector and makes it more difficult for prosecutors to identify and punish those who are trafficking people." Well that explains it. If you keep sex work regulated and give people an incentive to keep the market underground, people will engage in human trafficking. But traffickers won't attempt to "blend in" with the legal sector, claiming their victims are there on their own free will. Too risky when they can stay in the dark. "The vast majority of women in prostitution don’t want to be there. Few seek it out or choose it, and most are desperate to leave it. A 2003 study first published in the scientific Journal of Trauma Practice found that 89 percent of women in prostitution want to escape. [1]" The source they quote took data from nine countries: Zambia, Germany, Colombia, South Africa, Turkey, Canada, Mexico, Thailand, and the United States. Of those, only two have legalized prostitution and only one has legalized it in practice, namely Germany. Turkey doesn't issue prostitution permits anymore, and has demolished brothels on court order as well. As such it should come as no surprise that most of them want to leave it, since, without the protection of a legitimate business, sex workers get raped and beaten on a regular basis, both by clients and pimps. Further. the source claim these women have no other option for survival--otherwise they'd already be earning money otherwise. Of course, if they're branded as criminals, it doesn't help them find jobs. "Few activities are as brutal and damaging to people as prostitution. Field research in nine countries concluded that 60-75 percent of women in prostitution were raped, 70-95 percent were physically assaulted, and 68 percent met the criteria for post traumatic stress disorder in the same range as treatment-seeking combat veterans [2] and victims of state organized torture. [3]" Again, you're not going to be able to get an idea of how damaging legal prostitution is if you look at illegal prostitution. Same study as before. This study also claims prostitution is a form of economic violence in and of itself. Sure, but only if you're going to say any trade is economic violence. The article makes a mention of STIs. I think we've been through this enough, but if anyone wants to bring it up again, go ahead.

That's not what I meant. Some people frown upon drinking because they think people shouldn't drink (they even had it banned for a while here), in the same way you think people shouldn't have too much sex.

What might work for you might not be ideal for everyone else. You'd probably agree no one should shame you for getting drunk (heck, blackout wasted) at parties, so please keep your subjective values to yourself.

Also, regarding nwp's dog: I don't think it's meant to be interpreted the way you read it, because slut shaming against men is neither intensive nor extensive enough to warrant it.

Bold claim.

Lang, I know guys who criticize guys for being man [bleep]. Pretty sure Niki did the same. I'm not sure NWP's dog is so easy to interpret. [Edit] Seriously guys how often do my posts contain completely unrelated auto-corrected words?

Can we change his rank to slut? [Edit] I think it's really difficult to justify the claim that he's not happy when you're not in his head.

Donnie, I understand that people have plenty of good reasons to abstain. I just don't see which ones can seem valid to a self-described psychopath. Also, I disagree that social criticism can have no effect on society. I'd argue you can think of it in terms of utility theory if you so desire.

I figured. I'm just not quite sure why you're such a prude about sex to begin with. I'd expect someone as uncaring as you to be a total hedonist about it.

I'm pretty sure Vezon is what we casually call a psychopath at this point :lol: Vezon, do you realize how harmful slut shaming is?

Go on.

And you think you're in a position to tell people what to do why?

Men are a subset of humanity. I think most people ITT, if asked, will say that that slut shaming is something we should strive to eliminate as a society. But my experience has been that despite the fact that we all know it's not reasonable, we still have a negative knee-jerk reaction to promiscuity. That's why I don't think it's a good idea to consider it's all wrapped up and solved. It's also much more subtle than simply slandering "sluts". Undue attention to people's sexual relationships, whether or not it's explicitly disapproving, is also harmful.

You've got it backwards, RPG. His sig says slut shaming is hatred of men. The guy you're talking about also called out Niki for slut shaming in the thread muggi posted.